# Is there scientific evidence for the existence of chi/qi? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 21, 2007, 8:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816 "2007-12-21T08:08:33Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2007, 2:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816/41 "2007-12-26T14:15:10Z")
[QUOTE=lekatt] I told you my personal experience, not my opinion. [/QUOTE] Your personal experience is irrelevant. From the OP: > [@](#): > > I’m looking for insight into studies that have been done on chi (or “life energy” as some like to call it), and all of its theories and possible sightings in the scientific literature. If you could cite some learned study entitled “Images Of Auras On Personal Computers: A Confirmation of Life Force” published in the Journal Of Irreproducible Results, then we’d be getting somewhere. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![Czarcasm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/czarcasm/32/4050_2.png) [@Czarcasm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Czarcasm)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2007, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816/42 "2007-12-26T14:18:03Z")
[QUOTE=lekatt] I told you my personal experience, not my opinion. [/QUOTE] You’ve posted your personal interpretation of your personal experience without providing evidence to back it up. This is what is called _opinion._ ---
**Author:** ![BMalion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/e274bd/32.png) [@BMalion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BMalion)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2007, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816/43 "2007-12-26T15:40:25Z")
[QUOTE=glee] Chi is undetectable. If you can yield your mind and body to your will (not merely desires), you’ve got self-control. If you can choke people without touching them, you’ve got ‘Star Wars’. [/QUOTE] ::_makes choking motion with fingers_:: I grow tired of your lack of faith. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2007, 9:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816/44 "2007-12-26T21:54:59Z")
[QUOTE=Czarcasm] You’ve posted your personal interpretation of your personal experience without providing evidence to back it up. This is what is called _opinion._ [/QUOTE] And you sir: have posted your personal interpretation of my personal interpretation of my experience which is called personal experience. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2007, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816/45 "2007-12-26T22:01:21Z")
[QUOTE=Jackmannii] Your personal experience is irrelevant. From the OP:If you could cite some learned study entitled “Images Of Auras On Personal Computers: A Confirmation of Life Force” published in the Journal Of Irreproducible Results, then we’d be getting somewhere. :dubious: [/QUOTE] Yes, of course, and if such a publication should exist skeptics would say it is faulted. Now this is a very big world with billions of events happening every second, many of those events have not, maybe can not be measured by the scientific method, however these events are still there, real and can be experienced. Science is not the measure of my world, I do not need to be verified by the scientific method in order to experience life. I know what I experience. So do millions of other people. ---
**Author:** ![jjimm](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/ba8739/32.png) [@jjimm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jjimm)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2007, 10:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816/46 "2007-12-26T22:30:50Z")
[QUOTE=glee] Here is a claim by **a religion** : Li preaches that the “qi,” “ki,” or “chi” — the “energy substance in the human body” — can, through practice of **Falun Gong** [/QUOTE] My boldies. In fairness to “chi”, Falun Gong is a cult more than a religion, and is less than two decades old. Belief in chi is more continuous in traditional Chinese thought and goes back (up to) five millennia. That said, it’s clearly bunk. My opinion on the whole thing, as applied to Chinese medicine, is that it’s a) a collection of misinterpretations of genuine physical phenomena tied up in a single theory, but b) mostly benign or even effective, due to the largest-ever trial-and-error test group ever, wherein failed techniques end up with dead customers. ---
**Author:** ![Sophistry\_and\_Illusion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@Sophistry\_and\_Illusion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sophistry_and_Illusion)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2007, 10:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816/47 "2007-12-26T22:32:46Z")
[QUOTE=lekatt] Yes, of course, and if such a publication should exist skeptics would say it is faulted. Now this is a very big world with billions of events happening every second, many of those events have not, maybe can not be measured by the scientific method, however these events are still there, real and can be experienced. Science is not the measure of my world, I do not need to be verified by the scientific method in order to experience life. I know what I experience. So do millions of other people. [/QUOTE] But you just posted above that the aura can be detected by physical equipment and displayed on a computer screen, which presumably means that it can be studied scientifically. I know you just post whatever seems the most apt reply to whoever is criticizing you at the moment, without making any attempt to achieve consistency among your various replies, but you could at least make an effort to think before posting. Unless you really are just incapable of detecting incompatibility among various propositions, which I am strongly beginning to suspect. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [December 26, 2007, 10:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816/48 "2007-12-26T22:49:01Z")
[QUOTE=WoodenTaco] Uhh.. What? You found a computer program that detects an aura of love? Am I whooshing like crazy here? [/QUOTE] It’s probably true; I myself possess a small camera-like device that records evidence of self-love. If it will help further the debate, I’ll gladly post a link… ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2007, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816/49 "2007-12-28T16:42:16Z")
[QUOTE=Sophistry and Illusion] But you just posted above that the aura can be detected by physical equipment and displayed on a computer screen, which presumably means that it can be studied scientifically. I know you just post whatever seems the most apt reply to whoever is criticizing you at the moment, without making any attempt to achieve consistency among your various replies, but you could at least make an effort to think before posting. Unless you really are just incapable of detecting incompatibility among various propositions, which I am strongly beginning to suspect. [/QUOTE] Well, you sound like you know me better than I know myself, so you answer your own questions as you have in the past. ---
**Author:** ![Musicat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/musicat/32/20189_2.png) [@Musicat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Musicat)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2007, 5:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816/50 "2007-12-28T17:55:12Z")
[QUOTE=lekatt] And here we have someone who knows all, see all, tells all. Sorry if I don’t believe your nonsense. [/QUOTE] Sorry if we don’t believe _your_ nonsense, either. ---
**Author:** ![Sophistry\_and\_Illusion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@Sophistry\_and\_Illusion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sophistry_and_Illusion)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2007, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816/51 "2007-12-28T20:32:23Z")
[QUOTE=lekatt] Well, you sound like you know me better than I know myself, so you answer your own questions as you have in the past. [/QUOTE] Well, since you don’t answer the questions, someone has to. It is my sincere regret that you seem interested in participating in \*\*ITR champion’s \*\* upcoming threads, since no doubt you will pollute them with the same nonsense with which you pollute every other GD thread in which you participate. If you haven’t noticed by now, NOBODY APPRECIATES YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THESE THREADS. They are annoying, ignorant, and frequently divert threads into irrelevant tangents. If you’ve noticed, not even your fellow theists come to your defense. Have you noticed that? Do you appreciate what that means? So take a hint: stay the hell out of these threads, unless you are willing to seriously alter the way you post. ---
**Author:** ![raindog](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/2bfe46/32.png) [@raindog](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/raindog)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2007, 8:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816/52 "2007-12-28T20:45:58Z")
[QUOTE=Sophistry and Illusion] Well, since you don’t answer the questions, someone has to. It is my sincere regret that you seem interested in participating in \*\*ITR champion’s \*\* upcoming threads, since no doubt you will pollute them with the same nonsense with which you pollute every other GD thread in which you participate. If you haven’t noticed by now, NOBODY APPRECIATES YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THESE THREADS. They are annoying, ignorant, and frequently divert threads into irrelevant tangents. If you’ve noticed, not even your fellow theists come to your defense. Have you noticed that? Do you appreciate what that means? So take a hint: stay the hell out of these threads, unless you are willing to seriously alter the way you post. [/QUOTE] Since you seem to be speaking for everybody, I’d have to say that I appreciate the tone and tenor of several of the posts I’ve read from **lekatt** in GD threads. In all honesty, I can say I do appreciate **lekatt** ’s posts—at least the few I can remember. OTOH, of the posts I can remember of yours (like **lekatt** ’s, few in number) one in particular struck me as pompous, arrogant and presumptuous. Next time you propose to speak for all of us, please check with us first. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2007, 8:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816/53 "2007-12-28T20:46:18Z")
[QUOTE=Sophistry and Illusion] Well, since you don’t answer the questions, someone has to. It is my sincere regret that you seem interested in participating in \*\*ITR champion’s \*\* upcoming threads, since no doubt you will pollute them with the same nonsense with which you pollute every other GD thread in which you participate. If you haven’t noticed by now, NOBODY APPRECIATES YOUR CONTRIBUTIONS TO THESE THREADS. They are annoying, ignorant, and frequently divert threads into irrelevant tangents. If you’ve noticed, not even your fellow theists come to your defense. Have you noticed that? Do you appreciate what that means? So take a hint: stay the hell out of these threads, unless you are willing to seriously alter the way you post. [/QUOTE] As your posts are only personal attacks, how do they contribute to the thread? ---
**Author:** ![Sophistry\_and\_Illusion](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/b3f665/32.png) [@Sophistry\_and\_Illusion](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sophistry_and_Illusion)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2007, 8:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816/54 "2007-12-28T20:52:02Z")
[QUOTE=lekatt] As your posts are only personal attacks, how do they contribute to the thread? [/QUOTE] They are not personal attacks. They are attacks on your posting style, and an invitation for you to quit screwing up GD threads for the rest of us. As I noted, Dopers seem unanimous in condemning your method of ‘argumentation’; you have no defenders. In fact, I don’t remember anyone, theist or atheist, really ever coming to your defense. You should reflect on this fact in a spirit of humility and try to decide if perhaps this means that your posting style really needs improvement, or if I just have a personal vendetta against you. At any rate, if you think my posts represent a personal attack, you know where the “Report Post” button is. I have never received a Mod warning, and I don’t think I will receive one now. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2007, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816/55 "2007-12-28T21:18:52Z")
[QUOTE=Sophistry and Illusion] They are not personal attacks. They are attacks on your posting style, and an invitation for you to quit screwing up GD threads for the rest of us. As I noted, Dopers seem unanimous in condemning your method of ‘argumentation’; you have no defenders. In fact, I don’t remember anyone, theist or atheist, really ever coming to your defense. You should reflect on this fact in a spirit of humility and try to decide if perhaps this means that your posting style really needs improvement, or if I just have a personal vendetta against you. At any rate, if you think my posts represent a personal attack, you know where the “Report Post” button is. I have never received a Mod warning, and I don’t think I will receive one now. [/QUOTE] Would you care to comment of what you mean by “my style.” ---
**Author:** ![Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/bosda_di_chi_of_tricor/32/16845_2.png) [@Bosda\_Di\_Chi\_of\_Tricor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bosda_Di_Chi_of_Tricor)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2007, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816/56 "2007-12-28T21:26:49Z")
[QUOTE=lekatt] Would you care to comment of what you mean by “my style.” [/QUOTE] Jabbering screeds, dotted with discredited quasi-mysticism. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2007, 9:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816/57 "2007-12-28T21:37:29Z")
[QUOTE=Bosda Di’Chi of Tricor] Jabbering screeds, dotted with discredited quasi-mysticism. [/QUOTE] It is the content you object to? Rather your opinion of the content? ---
**Author:** ![human\_extinction](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/839c29/32.png) [@human\_extinction](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/human_extinction)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2007, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816/58 "2007-12-28T21:47:53Z")
In case none of you have noticed: this is great debates; not general discussion. Lets try to inject some seriousness back into my thread before it dies a terrible gruesome death: > **[Tai chi for rheumatoid arthritis: systematic review - PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17634188/?ordinalpos=4&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum)** > > The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate data from controlled clinical trials testing the effectiveness of tai chi for treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Systematic searches were conducted on Medline, Pubmed, AMED, British Nursing... [http://www.qigonginstitute.org/html/papers.php](http://www.qigonginstitute.org/html/papers.php) [http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1697750](http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1697750) pubmed doesn’t directly provide the full paper versions, but there is lots of other stuff there. Furthermore, qigong institute provides a bunch in full version. The third link is of pretty good content, but unfortunately the P values are too low to say much. ---
**Author:** ![lekatt](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lekatt/32/7269_2.png) [@lekatt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/lekatt)\ **Post date:** [December 28, 2007, 9:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816/59 "2007-12-28T21:57:12Z")
[QUOTE=human\_extinction] In case none of you have noticed: this is great debates; not general discussion. Lets try to inject some seriousness back into my thread before it dies a terrible gruesome death: > **[Tai chi for rheumatoid arthritis: systematic review - PubMed](https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/17634188/?ordinalpos=4&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum)** > > The objective of this systematic review is to evaluate data from controlled clinical trials testing the effectiveness of tai chi for treating rheumatoid arthritis (RA). Systematic searches were conducted on Medline, Pubmed, AMED, British Nursing... [http://www.qigonginstitute.org/html/papers.php](http://www.qigonginstitute.org/html/papers.php) [http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1697750](http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1697750) pubmed doesn’t directly provide the full paper versions, but there is lots of other stuff there. Furthermore, qigong institute provides a bunch in full version. The third link is of pretty good content, but unfortunately the P values are too low to say much. [/QUOTE] Yes! I apologize for my part in the above, thanks for the links. 🙂 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/is-there-scientific-evidence-for-the-existence-of-chi-qi/430816.md?page=2)